Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976

8 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHAversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1983 INSC 20316 December 1983Disposed off

The petition, filed by a social welfare organisation, alleged that thousands of migrant workers in stone quarries and crushers in Faridabad were subjected to inhuman conditions, forced labour and bondage, violating their fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution. The Court treated the letter addre

PUBLIC UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIESversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2012 INSC 47215 October 2012Disposed off

The Public Union for Civil Liberties filed a public‑interest writ petition seeking enforcement of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and the rehabilitation of freed bonded labourers. The Supreme Court examined the persistent non‑compliance of several states and Union Territories with earlier court direction

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 18713 August 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 after a letter complained of bonded labour in stone quarries of Faridabad, Haryana. It appointed commissioners and investigators to examine the working conditions and the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and related statutes.

P. SIVASWAMYversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1988 INSC 21610 August 1988Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by P. Sivaswamy after a social organisation’s letter alleged widespread bonded labour in stone quarries of Andhra Pradesh. The Court directed the State of Andhra Pradesh and the concerned states of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Orissa to identify, release

TEJ SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1994 INSC 20210 May 1994Disposed off

Tej Singh, a Gram Sewak, obtained an allotment of five bighas of government land in 1968 under the Rajasthan Colonisation (Medium & Minor Irrigation Projects Government Lands Allotment) Rules, 1968. In 1980 the Additional Collector cancelled the allotment under Rule 17‑A, alleging that Singh had concealed his employmen

PUBLIC UNION OF CLVIL LIBERTIESversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

2004 INSC 3575 May 2004

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by the Public Union for Civil Liberties concerning the plight of migrant bonded labourers, especially those from Tamil Nadu working in other states. The Court noted that earlier orders had tasked the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) with monitoring the implemen

MUKESH ADVANIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1985 INSC 1202 May 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by Mukesh Advani on behalf of bonded labourers from Tamil Nadu working in stone quarries at Raisen, Madhya Pradesh, alleging exploitation through advance payments, piece‑rate wages below minimum, and denial of statutory protections. An investigative report and a Distr

LABOURERS WORKING ON SALAL HYDRO-PROJECTversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 182 March 1983Appeal(s) allowed

A news report prompted the People's Union for Democratic Rights to file a writ petition alleging that migrant labourers on the Salal Hydro‑Electric Project were denied statutory benefits. The Supreme Court examined reports of the Labour Commissioner, which revealed that the project, executed by the National Hydro Elect

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search